|
April 11, 2025
Transcript – ABC News Breakfast
11 April 2025
E&OE
JAMES GLENDAY:
There is a bit to chat about and we're joined now by the spokesperson for the Coalition campaign, Senator James Paterson. He is in Parramatta. James, good morning.
JAMES PATERSON:
Good morning.
JAMES GLENDAY:
I wanted to get to one of your policy announcements in a moment, but a number of newspapers this morning are running a story that Peter Dutton was the target of an alleged bomb plot. So what can you tell us about this? And are politicians safe as they go about this election campaign?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, Peter Dutton has served our country in public life for 20 years and for a decade before that as a police officer. Unfortunately, sometimes there is a price to pay for that. I guess the most distressing thing about that, though, is it's a price that Peter doesn't just have to pay personally, but his family has to pay as well. It's why they require around the clock personal police protection. But if plots like this are aimed at intimidating Peter and his family, or the other threats he received are aimed at doing that, then they will fail because Peter is a strong person, he loves this country, and he will do everything he can to stand up for our country and to make it safe.
JAMES GLENDAY:
I just wanted to ask, I mean, you're involved in security committees. I mean, you got links into the intelligence services. Do you think that politicians generally are safe as they campaign at the moment?
JAMES PATERSON:
Australia is a remarkably safe country. We don't have the history of political violence that a lot of other countries do, but there are some very disturbing trends that have been observed in the last couple of years in particular, and the federal police have said, that threats to politicians and other public figures are higher than they have ever been. And I think that is extremely worrying for two reasons. One, if an act of political violence happened in this country, it would change our country forever in a significantly worse way. But two frankly significant police resources are diverted to protecting politicians from things like this, as they have to be. But that's police resources that can't be out there solving crime and protecting Australians. So I really hope to see this trend turn around for the sake of our country.
JAMES GLENDAY:
Now the government introduced fuel efficiency standards. It said that it was basically us and Russia without these standards. The idea is to lower car emissions to make it easier to hit some of our climate targets. Why are you planning to wind back these laws?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, because under Labor, you won't just pay more for fuel, you pay more for cars as well. The car industry estimates that the best selling car in Australia, the Toyota Rav4, will be $9,000 more expensive under Labor's family car and ute tax. The best selling ute in Australia, the Ford Ranger, will be $14,000 more expensive. And I think in the middle of a cost of living crisis, Australians can't afford to pay more for cars like this. We strongly support choice when it comes to cars. For some families that will be an EV and we strongly support the uptake of EVs. And there's pretty strong incentives already to buy an EV because you're exempt from fuel tax and you don't contribute to the cost of maintaining and building roads if you drive an EV, unlike petrol and diesel users. But we shouldn't take that choice away from families, because for some families, a petrol or diesel car or hybrid is the choice for them. And the bizarre thing about this policy is it also drives up the cost of hybrid vehicles, which are reducing emissions.
JAMES GLENDAY:
So there are a few things we need to put in context there, this is definitely not a tax. It's a fuel efficiency standard for a whole fleet. And some in the automotive sector had argued for this, saying that Australia was being excluded from receiving certain types of EVs because we didn't have these efficiencies in place. Is there a risk if you wind back the penalties for car companies that don't hit these targets, that we won't get as many EVs imported into Australia?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, I'm sorry, James, I have to disagree with you. If carmakers sell too many petrol and diesel cars, they face up to $2.7 billion in fines that they have to pay to the Australian government, and the cost of that is passed on to users. And that's why the best selling car, the Rav4, will be $9,000 more expensive, one of the other best selling cars, the Toyota Hilux, will be $11,000 more expensive. So it absolutely is a tax.
JAMES GLENDAY:
It's definitely not a tax; that is not how it works.
JAMAES PATERSON:
It absolutely is, that is exactly how it works.
JAMES GLENDAY:
We can argue about whether it's a tax or not. The idea though is that it reduces our climate emissions over time, though, and hopefully it encourages more EVs, more fuel efficient vehicles to come into Australia.
JAMES PATERSON:
Australians suffer no lack of choice when it comes to electric vehicles. They're widely available and they're becoming cheaper all the time because the technology is improving. And if that's the choice that works for your family, good on you. You should go out and buy an EV, and no one in the Coalition is going to stand in the way of you doing that. In fact, you'll be exempt from fuel tax, unlike everyone else, and you have a great advantage in that. But for some families, a big family car that's powered by petrol and diesel is the choice for them. That works for their family and obviously for a lot of trades and professions, a ute is critically important to them. And increasing the cost of a Ford Ranger by $14,000 isn't going to make our country any more prosperous, and it isn't going to make life any more affordable for Australian families. And that's why we will repeal this tax.
JAMES GLENDAY:
All right. Let's go on to just another issue. Yesterday, the Coalition Energy Spokesman, Ted O'Brien, who was on our program earlier this week, appeared to leave the door open to exiting the Paris Climate Accord if certain conditions were met. A few frontbenchers have walked this back since. What is the Coalition's position here?
JAMES PATERSON:
We're totally committed to the Paris Climate Agreement and achieving net zero emissions by 2050. It's the whole reason why we proposed to make a very big change to our country, which is to introduce emissions free, reliable, affordable nuclear technology, which we believe is the only way to sustainably reduce emissions and meet our targets. What we have said, though, is that Labor's 2030 target of a 43% reduction of emissions from 2005 levels is not achievable. When we left government three years ago, we'd already reduced it by 28.5%, but in the three years since, Labor has only increased that emissions reduction to a little bit over 29%. So they're now proposing to do in five years a further 14% reduction, when in three years they've only been able to achieve about a 1% reduction. So we just think that interim target is not achievable and we're not going to mislead the Australian people about that.
JAMES GLENDAY:
And just to go back to what we're talking about with cars, If you've got these climate targets. Does it make it harder to hit if you are not phasing out some of the most polluting cars in Australia?
JAMES PATERSON:
Well, we don't believe so because we think that consumer choice is driving that change already. Consumers are voting with their feet. They're buying both hybrids and EVs, and that is bringing down vehicle emissions, and that's a good thing. And we support that and we encourage that. And certainly when you get closer to 2050, that's going to accelerate. But we believe the most important thing we can do is follow the rest of the developed world. 19 of the world's largest economies either have and use nuclear energy or are moving towards it. We don't think a renewables only strategy, which Labor has of 98% renewables by 2050, is a sustainable or responsible way to reduce emissions.
JAMES GLENDAY:
Nuclear is a whole other debate. We're not going to get into that this morning. We do appreciate you coming on the program, James.
JAMES PATERSON:
Thanks, James.
ENDS